Is God a liar?

[Colter]

Here, some people with a lot of time on their hands covered all the reasons why the flood (written for the child like mind of Bronze Age sheep herders) just does not work!

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

 

[Smidlee]

Here, some people with a lot of time on their hands covered all the reasons why the flood (written for the child like mind of Bronze Age sheep herders) just does not work!

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Talkorigins? LOL The evolutionist Bible.

 

[brinny]

God of course is no liar. However, sometimes we don't read His word the way it needs to be read. If we read a psalm literally instead of figuratively (the way a song is supposed to be read) we might think a tree is literally supposed to clap. In the same way, many don't read Genesis in its myth genre, and then mistakenly think its statements are literal scientific and historically binding statements. As a myth we are to read it as a teaching story and get the point: God created.

It would be a necessity to read His word with wisdom, discernment, and clarity, would it not? isn't wisdom freely given, as it states in James? In addition, the Holy Spirit is our very capable Teacher, as it is written that He is. It is written that God's Word is a Lamp unto our feet and a Light unto our path. This indicates that our understanding is illuminated, as we delve into His Word. It is also written not to rely on our own understanding but to trust in God with all our hearts (Proverbs 3:5). To do so would require trust in and faith in a God Who never errs, makes mistakes or lies. It is wisdom through Him that the "trees clapping" is understood. In looking at the verse that you refer to, it is clear that there is joy and rejoicing and certainly there is glory in God's handiwork (the trees of the field, the flowers on the hills, just as it says in Psalm 19:1 "To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.")

Yes, He is Creator. It is through Him that we have our being and our very breath. He is holy, perfect, and changes not. Here is a video that i was just meditating on. In it descriptions of His character are stated. Amongst His character mentioned is that He IS Truth. He is the very epitome of it. And as such, He never ever lies.

Thank you kindly.

 

[Colter]

Talkorigins? LOL The evolutionist Bible.

After God drowned everyone, except an ancestor of the people who created the story, all life would have rapidly re-evolved and spread all around the earth real quick. Like a chia pet. So evolving life is hard to get away from either way.

 

[KWCrazy]

(written for the child like mind of Bronze Age sheep herders)

What condescending arrogance!
I would comment, but it's seriously not worth it.
I'll just use the ignore feature and save the pixels.

 

[Colter]

What condescending arrogance!
I would comment, but it's seriously not worth it.
I'll just use the ignore feature and save the pixels.

That was my thought exactly when I read what the Hebrew priest wrote to the Israelite people about the "Gentiles".

 

[BobRyan]

All the scientific evidence points to an ancient earth. Furthermore, the fossil records support the slow change of species over time, such as dinosaurs to birds. *IF* these things are not true, it would follow that God deliberately created a world with false scientific data. Right? So then this begs the questions...

Did God lie?
And if God lied, why?

What do you believe?

I believe that wild assertion that the fossil record shows smooth transition from dinosaur to bird is less reliable than the Word of God -- the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

So then "what is it" that is soooo compelling that some would gladly 'trade in their Bibles' for it - or accuse God of lying because of it??

Let's ask someone in the athiest high-priest sector of blind faith evolutionism so no one on a Christian msg board need feel at all uneasy about the quote.

=================================================
Collin Patterson (atheist and diehard evolutionist to the day he died in 1998) - Paleontologist British Museum of Natural history speaking at the American Museum of Natural History in 1981 - said:

Patterson - quotes Gillespie's arguing that Christians

"'...holding creationist ideas could plead ignorance of the means and affirm only the fact,'"

Patterson countered, "That seems to summarize the feeling I get in talking to evolutionists today. They plead ignorance of the means of transformation, but affirm only the fact (saying):'Yes it has...we know it has taken place.'"

"...Now I think that many people in this room would acknowledge that during the last few years, if you had thought about it at all, you've experienced a shift from evolution as knowledge to evolution as faith. I know that's true of me, and I think it's true of a good many of you in here...


"...,Evolution not only conveys no knowledge, but seems somehow to convey anti-knowledge , apparent knowledge which is actually harmful to systematics..."


--======================= second quote


Colin Patterson (Senior paleontologist at the British Natural History Museum and author of the Museum’s general text on evolution) in a talk given at the American Museum of Natural History 1981

--------------------- Patterson said -

“Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing…that is true?

I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural history and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology seminar in the University of Chicago, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said “I know one thing – it ought not to be taught in high school”


"...I'm speaking on two subjects, evolutionism and creationism, and I believe it's true to say that I know nothing whatever about either...One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, well, let's call it non-evolutionary , was last year I had a sudden realization.

"For over twenty years I had thought that I was working on evolution in some way. One morning I woke up, and something had happened in the night, and it struck me that I had been working on this stuff fortwenty years, and there was not one thing I knew about it. "That was quite a shock that one could be misled for so long...

It does seem that the level of knowledge about evolution is remarkably shallow. We know it ought not to be taught in high school, and perhaps that's all we know about it...

about eighteen months ago...I woke up and I realized that all my life I had been duped into taking evolutionism as revealed truth in some way."
==============================================


April 10, 1979 Letter from Colin Patterson to Sunderland

“ I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them.

You suggest that an artist should be used to visualise such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?

I wrote the text of my book four years ago. If I were to write it now, I think the book would be rather different. Gradualism is a concept I believe in, not just because of Darwin’s authority, but because my understanding of genetics seems to demand it.

Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. As a paleontologist myself, I am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossil record.

You say that I should at least show a photo of the fossil from which each type of organism was derived. I will lay it on the line- there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.


The reason is that statements about ancestry and descent are not applicable in the fossil record. Is Archaeopteryx the ancestor of all birds? Perhaps yes, perhaps no there is no way of answering the question.

It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favored by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test.

So, much as I should like to oblige you by jumping to the defense of gradualism, and fleshing out the transitions between the major types of animals and plants, I find myself a bit short of the intellectual justification necessary for the job “

[Ref: Patterson, personal communication. Documented in Darwin’s Enigma, Luther Sunderland, Master Books, El Cajon, CA, 1988, pp. 88-90.]

 

[Colter]

I believe that wild assertion that the fossil record shows smooth transition from dinosaur to bird is less reliable than the Word of God -- the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

The authors of the Bible books didn't claim to be writing the Word of God, that idea evolved itself generations after the authors were long forgotten. The idea comes from religious authority as the institution uses the idea to substantiate it's ruling, controlling authority.

In the evolution of life (initiated by God) changes are sudden. With man we would have had advanced humans born of Primates, the first true human beings.

 

[BobRyan]

It would be a necessity to read His word with wisdom, discernment, and clarity, would it not? isn't wisdom freely given, as it states in James? In addition, the Holy Spirit is our very capable Teacher, as it is written that He is. It is written that God's Word is a Lamp unto our feet and a Light unto our path. ...

Great post - nice video - thanks for sharing it!

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The authors of the Bible books didn't claim to be writing the Word of God,

Until you read it - Moses states repeatedly that these words are God's Words - see Exodus 20.

At no point does Genesis start out with Moses saying "Hey guys I just had a great idea...what if..." -- nor was Moses a "Darwinist" leading some fellow darwinists around in the wilderness.

that idea evolved itself generations after the authors were long forgotten. The idea comes from church authority as the institution uses the idea to substantiate it's ruling, controlling authority.

Until you read 2Tim 3:16 "ALL scripture is given by inspiration from God AND is to be used for doctrine, correction, instruction"

In Heb 3 "The Holy Spirit said" - then quotes the Word of God in the OT.

In the evolution of life (initiated by God) changes are sudden. With man we would have had advanced humans born of Primates, the first true human beings.

Now 'that' is an example of a "story" - by contrast with actual scripture. The comparison is striking.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Or perhaps you are simply not reading Genesis 1 in its correct genre. It's like saying God is a liar because trees don't literally clap their hands as the psalms say.

In Ex 20:11 the "genre" is legal code "for in SIX DAYS the LORD MADE the heavens and the earth the seas and all that is in them".

In Gen 1-2 the "genre" is historic account.

Originally Posted by BobRyan ============================================
One leading Hebrew scholar is James Barr, Professor of Hebrew Bible at Vanderbilt University and former Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University in England. Although he does not believe in the historicity of Genesis 1, Dr. Barr does agree that the writer's intent was to narrate the actual history of primeval creation. Others also agree with him.

"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience; . . . Or, to put it negatively, the apologetic arguments which suppose the "days" of creation to be long eras of time, the figures of years not to be chronological, and the flood to be a merely local Mesopotamian flood, are not taken seriously by any such professors, as far as I know. "

James Barr, letter to David Watson, 1984.
================================

 

[Colter]

Until you read it - Moses states repeatedly that these words are God's Words - see Exodus 20.

At no point does Genesis start out with Moses saying "Hey guys I just had a great idea...what if..." -- nor was Moses a "Darwinist" leading some fellow darwinists around in the wilderness.



Until you read 2Tim 3:16 "ALL scripture is given by inspiration from God AND is to be used for doctrine, correction, instruction"

In Heb 3 "The Holy Spirit said" - then quotes the Word of God in the OT.



Now 'that' is an example of a "story" - by contrast with actual scripture. The comparison is striking.

in Christ,

Bob

Right, 2Timothy (which wasn't scripture when it was written and it's authorship in dispute) gives an opinion 2000 years after Moses, about the Hebrew scriptures, written in the Hebrew language which dates to 1,000 years after Moses lived.

That's a good example of how the writing of some holy man becomes Gods writing.

BTW, Moses was a reformer of still earlier practices and beliefs for which there is NO Scripture in existence.

 

[BobRyan]

Right, 2Timothy (which wasn't scripture when it was written and it's authorship in dispute) gives an opinion 2000 years after Moses, about the Hebrew scriptures, written in the Hebrew language which dates to 1,000 years after Moses lived.

Peter says that Paul's writing - (2Tim 3 in this case) - was scripture when written.

Paul claims that his writings are being accepted by his hearers as "The Word of God" in 1Thess 2.

1 Thess 2
13 For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.

so it is the "Word of God" calling the writings of Moses "The Holy Spirit said" and "Scripture" notice that in Mark 7:6-13 Moses' writings are stated by Christ Himself as "The Word of God" and "the Commandment of God".

Was Christ also just guessing? Or "just being influenced along with the rest" and so...clueless about the historic facts?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Colter]

Peter says that Paul's writing - (2Tim 3 in this case) - was scripture when written.

Paul claims that his writings are being accepted by his hearers as "The Word of God" in 1Thess 2.

1 Thess 2
13 For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe.

so it is the "Word of God" calling the writings of Moses "The Holy Spirit said" and "Scripture" notice that in Mark 7:6-13 Moses' writings are stated by Christ Himself as "The Word of God" and "the Commandment of God".

Was Christ also just guessing? Or "just being influenced along with the rest" and so...clueless about the historic facts?

in Christ,

Bob

Jesus wasn't on the earth to reform Judaism, besides they also used the doctrine of scripture inerrancy to reject the Son of God as well.

I respect your convictions as sincere, if you are interested you may want to investigate the scholarship of the authorship of the epistles of Paul as well as 2 Peter in particular.

Lets agree to disagree and continue on in our faith in the Son of God aka "Christ Michael".

 

[Calminian]

I don't understand your criticism. Do you have any evidence that the moon isn't made of cheese, or maybe half cheese on the dark side? Do we need evidence to refute ridiculous claims?

What criticism? I'm merely pointing out an observation. You're about faith, not evidence. You're eve defending it.

 

[Meowzltov]

In Gen 1-2 the "genre" is historic account.

No, it's not.

 

[Colter]

The need to be the center of attention and it's working.

What criticism? I'm merely pointing out an observation. You're about faith, not evidence. You're eve defending it.

Eve? Faith in God? What are you talking about? Plain English please.

 

[Calminian]

The need to be the center of attention and it's working.

Eve? Faith in God? What are you talking about? Plain English please.

I meant "even."

No, it's not.

Ah, but it is.

 

[Colter]

I meant "even."



Ah, but it is.

I meant "even."



Ah, but it is.

You will need to be less cryptic if you have a point. Did you have a chance to review the flood myth debunking link? While it should be common sense to any adult, the talk origins people went through and demonstrated the many problems with the Hebrews genealogy story. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html